## Contents

| Section | Page | |------------------------------------------------------------------------|------| | Contents | 2 | | Introduction | 3 | | Changes in reporting | 4 | | Users of the statistics | 4 | | Next publication | 4 | | Key Findings | 5 | | 1: Civil (excluding family) cases | 6 | | 2: Judicial Reviews at the Administrative Court | 14 | | Annex A: Planned upcoming changes to publication | 20 | | Annex B: List of Accompanying Tables and CSV | 21 | | Annex C: Timeline of changes to civil procedures | 22 | | Annex D: Explanatory notes | 23 | | Further information | 24 | Introduction

This statistical bulletin presents statistics on two key areas of civil and administrative justice:

- County court civil (non-family) cases that took place in England and Wales in July to September 2016; and
- Judicial review cases processed by the administrative court in England and Wales up to September 2016.

The figures give an overview of the volume of cases dealt with by these courts over time and are used to monitor court workloads, assist in the development of policy and their subsequent monitoring and evaluation.

Civil cases covered by this publication are those that do not involve family matters or failure to pay council tax. These cases are mainly dealt with by county courts and typically relate to debt, the repossession of property, personal injury, the return of goods and insolvency. Particularly important, complex or substantial cases are instead dealt with in the High Court.

Judicial reviews (JRs) are a process by which individuals, businesses and other affected parties can challenge the lawfulness of decisions or actions of the executive, including those of ministers, local authorities, other public bodies and those exercising public functions. It is a largely judge-developed procedure and can be characterised as the rule of law in action, providing a key mechanism for individuals to hold the executive to account. It is, however, intended to operate quickly and proportionately. Certain protections are in principle provided against spurious claims: only those with sufficient interest are able to bring a case and they must first obtain permission for their case to be heard.

Information about the systems and data included in this publication can be found in ‘A Guide to Civil Court and Administrative Justice Statistics’ which is published alongside this report.

www.gov.uk/government/statistics/guide-to-civil-and-administrative-justice-statistics

There is also a separate glossary published alongside this which provides brief definitions for the terms used in this report. Information regarding the symbols and conventions used in the bulletin are given in the explanatory notes section.

Previous editions of Civil Justice Statistics Quarterly can be found here:

www.gov.uk/government/collections/civil-justice-statistics-quarterly Changes in reporting

In this edition of Civil Justice Statistics Quarterly, we have added a column to table 1.4 (Judgments and outcomes in the county courts), to give the number of default judgments. This information was previously available in the publications accompanying workload csv file.

Users of the statistics

The main users of these statistics are ministers and officials in central government responsible for developing policy with regards to civil and administrative justice. Other users include lawyers and academics, other central government departments such as the Department for Communities and Local Government, and non-governmental bodies, including various voluntary organisations with an interest in civil and administrative justice.

Next publication

The next publication of Civil Justice Statistics Quarterly is scheduled to be published on 2 March 2017, covering the period October to December 2016. This will also include the bi-annual privacy injunction chapter (for the period July to December 2016) Key Findings

Civil cases

- In July to September 2016, courts dealt with around 494,000 claims and 283,000 judgments were made, up 24% and 32% respectively on the same quarter in the previous year. Of the number of judgments made, 242,000 (85%) were default.

- The increases were driven by specified money claims being issued at the County Court Business Centre (CCBC). The CCBC had 102,000 more claims (up 43%) compared with the same quarter last year, with just over half (54%) of this increase being for claim amounts of up to £500.

- Non-money claims are at their lowest third-quarter level since quarterly records began (2000), at around 71,000. This has been driven by a continued drop in mortgage and landlord possession claims, which stood at 38,900 in July to September 2016 (down 11% on the same quarter last year).

- In July to September 2016, both the claimant and defendant had legal representation in 53% of all defences (down 7 percentage points on the same quarter last year); compared with 25% of defences where only the claimant had representation (an increase of 7 percentage points over the same period).

- The shift in proportion is driven in part by a reduction in the overall number of unspecified money defences (down 9%) – this claim type has the highest proportion in the both claimant and respondent representation (97% of unspecified money defences); and by an increase in specified money defences (up 22% on the same quarter last year) - of which a higher proportion are for claimant only representation.

Judicial reviews at the Administrative Court

- In January to September 2016, there have been 3,300 applications for judicial review (JR), a 2% increase on the same period of 2015.

- 58% of the 2016 applications were for civil immigration and asylum JRs, 36% were other civil cases and 5% were criminal.

- Around 1,900 of these applications (58% of all cases lodged in 2016) reached the permission or oral renewal stage and of these 21% were found to be totally without merit. This is one percentage point higher than the proportion seen annually in 2015 (where 79% of all cases lodged reached the permission or oral renewal stage). 1: Civil (excluding family) cases

A civil claim against a person or a company (the defendant) starts when a person or company (the claimant) completes and submits a claim form to the county court. This can be done either in person or online (for money and possession claims only). A copy of the claim form along with a response pack is sent to (served on) the defendant who has 14 days to respond to the claim. For money claims, if the defendant disputes (defends) the claim (in full or part) and mediation fails, the case is allocated by a judge to one of three case-management tracks (small claims track (for claims with a value less that £10K), fast track or multi track). Allocated cases which are not settled or withdrawn generally result in a small claim hearing or trial. A judgment regarding the claim can be made at various stages of the process. There are various methods of enforcing a judgment through the county courts including warrants and charging orders.

Number of claims issued and Judgments made

In July to September 2016, a total of 494,148 claims were issued, a 24% increase on the same quarter last year (see Table 1.1 and Figure 1.1). This is the highest quarterly total since 2008, and is driven entirely by an increasing trend in specified money claims. Looking at the longer term annually, there was a general downward trend in the total number of claims between 2006 and 2012, which has since reversed (albeit with a slight decrease of 2% in 2015 compared to 2014). Figures for the first three quarters of 2016 suggest a continuation of the increasing trend.

In July to September 2016, 86% of all claims were money claims, an increase of five percentage points on the same quarter in 2015. Of these money claims, 91% (386,735) related to claims for specified amounts of money (two percentage points higher than the same quarter last year). This represents a sharp increase in the number of specified money claims, up 35% from the same quarter last year. The vast majority of these claims (340,922, or 88%) were issued at the County Court Business Centre (CCBC) in Northampton, which has responsibility for issuing specified money claims filed via the internet.

Claimants at the CCBC fall into two main categories: MCOL (Money Claim On Line) claimants and bulk issuers. MCOL claimants are usually individuals filing a claim via the moneyclaim.gov.uk website. Bulk issuers are generally companies that issue a large number of claims each quarter, and this is the main driver of the observed increase in specified money claims. Of this increase in claims seen at the CCBC, just over half (55%) were for claims amounts of up to £500, 20% were for over £500 to £1,000 and 23% for over £1,000 to £5,000 amounts.

The remaining 9% (36,470) of money claims related to unspecified money claims, down three percentage points from the same quarter last year (Table 1.2). Unspecified money claims include personal injury, which make up the overwhelming majority of these claims. In July to September 2016, 95% of unspecified money claims were for personal injury, the same level seen in July to September 2015. This proportion has been consistent since the second quarter of 2012, when the County Court Money Claims Centre (CCMCC) took over the processing of the money claims and more accurately recorded personal injury claims (Table 1.2). Personal injury claims were down 1% on the same quarter of 2015.

In July to September 2016, there were 70,943 non-money claims, down 8% on the same quarter in 2015. This continues a general downward trend since 2009 which can be partially explained by the fall in mortgage and landlord possession claims; there were 38,900 such claims in the most recent quarter, an 11% decrease on the same quarter in 2015. This coincided with lower interest rates, a proactive approach from mortgage lenders in managing consumers in financial difficulties, and various interventions, such as introduction of the Mortgage Pre-Action Protocol(^1) that encouraged more pre-action contact between lender and borrower (Table 1.2).

There were 1,702 insolvency petitions(^2) (excluding those raised in the Royal Courts of Justice) in July to September 2016. This shows a 67% decrease on the same quarter last year, which has been driven by debtor petitions moving to an online system on 6 April 2016, and no longer being heard in court(^3).

In July to September 2016, a total of 282,944 judgments were made, up 32% on the same period last year and of which, 85% (241,612) were default judgements. This is primarily driven by the increase seen in specified money claims.

(^1) For more information on mortgage and landlord possession statistics trends and the Mortgage Pre-Action Protocol, see [www.gov.uk/government/collections/mortgage-and-landlord-possession-statistics](http://www.gov.uk/government/collections/mortgage-and-landlord-possession-statistics)

(^2) Insolvency petitions relate to bankruptcy or companies “winding up”

(^3) For numbers of debtor petitions and a more detailed breakdown of insolvency petitions in general, please see [www.gov.uk/government/collections/insolvency-service-official-statistics](http://www.gov.uk/government/collections/insolvency-service-official-statistics) In July to September 2016, there were 71,148 defences made, 7% more than during the same quarter in 2015 (Figure 1.2). Looking at the longer term, there has been a general downward annual trend since the peak of just under 340,000 in 2007, with the 2014 figure being 264,701. Since 2014, the annual number of defences has remained stable, with 264,545 defences in 2015.

For money claims, if the claim is defended, further information is usually provided by each of the parties, after which the case is allocated by a judge to one of three case-management tracks. The provisional number of allocations recorded in July to September 2016, were 35,271. Although this suggests a 9% decrease on the same period last year (Table 1.3), previously when the provisional allocation figures have been revised the following quarter, they have increased. For example, last quarter the provisional figure was 35,800 and has subsequently been revised to 39,300—this provisional figure should therefore be used with caution. Further work is being carried out to investigate the large changes that occur between provisional and revised figures. Of the allocations made:

- Just under half (17,166, or 49%) were to the small claims track. This track is generally for cases with a claim value of up to £10,000(^4) which require less preparation by the parties involved than the more complex cases allocated to the fast or multi track. The trials are designed to be accessible to people who do not have representation by a solicitor or counsel, and are dealt with in about an hour.

- 43% (15,075) of claims were allocated to the fast track. This track is generally for cases with a claim value of between £10,000 and not more than £25,000, with issues not complex enough to merit more than a one day trial.

- 9% (3,030) of claims were allocated to the multi-track. This track is generally for cases with a claim value exceeding £25,000 with more complex issues. They generally last more than one day at trial.

Defended cases which are not settled or withdrawn generally result in a trial (Table 1.5). In total, there were 12,675 trials (of all types) in July to September 2016, level with the same quarter in 2015.

In July to September 2016, 8,563 small claims trials took place, a 5% decrease compared to the same quarter in 2015. On average, these trials occurred 31.1 weeks after the claim was originally made. This is similar to the average time taken in July to September 2015 (31.2 weeks).

Fast and multi-track trials (of which there were 4,112 in July to September 2016, an increase of 14% on July to September 2015) occurred on average 54.5 weeks after the claim was originally made (Table 1.5), compared with 53.2 weeks in the same quarter in 2015.

______________________________________________________________________

(^4) On 1 April 2013 due to a policy change, the maximum claim value for cases allocated to the small claims track increased from £5,000 to £10,000. Enforcement

There are various methods of enforcing a judgment through the county courts. The most common method of enforcing a monetary judgment is the warrant of execution against a debtor’s goods. This is where, unless the amount owed is paid, items owned by the debtor can be recovered by a bailiff acting on behalf of the court and sold.

Annually, the number of warrants issued has followed a decreasing trend since 2000, until 2014 when the trend reversed and the numbers increased. During July to September 2016, there were 72,572 warrants issued, representing a 21% increase on the same quarter last year (Table 1.4).

Alternatively, various types of court orders can be obtained:

- Attachment of earnings orders enable payment through the debtor’s employer.
- Third party debt orders enable payment by freezing and then seizing money owed by a third party to the debtor.
- Charging orders obtain security for the payment against the debtor’s assets. This may be followed by an order for sale which forces the sale of these assets.

In July to September 2016, 19,950 enforcement orders were made, a decrease of 27% compared to the same period last year. This figure has been generally falling since 2008. Legal representation

Figures on the legal representation of parties in civil (non-family) related court cases are shown in Table 1.6. This gives the number of claims defended during each quarter, by claim type (specified money claims, unspecified money claims, mortgage and landlord possession and other non-money claims) and according to whether the applicant(s), respondent(s), both, or neither had legal representation during the case.

In July to September 2016, both the claimant and defendant had legal representation in 53% of defences, whilst neither the respondent nor the claimant had representation in 18% of defences (compared with 60% and 18% respectively compared to the same quarter in 2015). Defences with either the claimant or defendant only represented were 25% and 3% of all defences respectively in this most recent quarter, compared to 18% and 4% respectively in the same period last year.

Figure 1.3 shows the proportion of defences broken down by representation status in England and Wales.

**Figure 1.3: Proportion of civil defences and legal representation status, January 2013 to September 2016 (quarterly)**

Changes to legal aid came into effect as of April 2013, and removed legal aid eligibility for some civil cases. Initially, the proportion of defences with legal representation for both parties fell during 2013, from 60% in April to June 2013 to a low of 53% in the same quarter of 2014. This then recovered back to 60% in July to September 2015. Since then a downward trend can be seen, corresponding with an increase in the proportion of claimant only representation defences. This shift in proportion is driven in part by a reduction in the overall number of unspecified money defences (down 9%) – this claim type has the highest proportion in the both claimant and respondent representation (97% of unspecified money defences); and by an increase in specified money defences (up 22% on the same quarter last year) - of which a higher proportion are for claimant only representation.

**Figure 1.4: Proportion of civil defences, by type of case and legal representation status, England and Wales, July to September 2016**

The proportion of legal representation for defences is dependent on the type of claim (Figure 1.4). For example, in almost all unspecified money claim defences (97%) both the respondent and claimant had legal representation. For the other types of defences, legal representation status was more evenly distributed, although mortgage and landlord possession defences were more likely to have no legal representation for either the respondent or the claimant.

The Legal Aid Agency (LAA - formerly the Legal Services Commission) collects statistics on those applying for legal aid, and figures on the number of applications received and certificates granted by various civil categories. These are published in their quarterly statistical report which can be found here: [www.gov.uk/government/collections/legal-aid-statistics](http://www.gov.uk/government/collections/legal-aid-statistics) Civil proceedings in the Magistrates’ Courts Magistrates’ courts deal with criminal and some civil cases, and cases are dealt with either by justices of the peace, who are unqualified and who are paid only expenses, or by District Judges who receive some payment. Magistrates can deal with a limited number of civil cases such as arrears of income tax, national insurance contributions, council tax or payments of child maintenance.

There were 15,786 completed civil proceedings in the Magistrates’ Court in July to September 2016, a 6% decrease on the same period last year (Table 1.2). It should be noted that a proceeding can either relate to a single case or multiple cases, so the numbers of cases completed is greater than the number of completed proceedings. 2: Judicial Reviews at the Administrative Court

Judicial reviews (JRs) are a process by which individuals, businesses and other affected parties can challenge the lawfulness of decisions or actions of the Executive, including those of ministers, local authorities, other public bodies and those exercising public functions. It is a largely judge-developed procedure and can be characterised as the rule of law in action, providing a key mechanism for individuals to hold the Executive to account.

This chapter tracks the progress of JRs lodged at the Administrative Court between 1 January 2000 and 30 September 2016. The figures presented in this chapter exclude Judicial Reviews that are dealt with by the Upper Tribunal Immigration and Asylum Chamber (UTIAC), unless otherwise stated; however they are publicly available in a separate publication.

As the information included in this chapter has been extracted from a live database, all figures are refreshed each quarter and therefore there are minor revisions between the information presented here and in previous publications.

Information for all years is provided in the supporting tables and CSV that accompany this publication. Please note for later years, cases may not have progressed to the end of the process, so the progression and timeliness figures for these cases should be treated with caution, in particular for applications lodged during the year 2015 and also 2016 to date, where a larger proportion of cases will not have been concluded.

For more information on the Judicial Review process, including how topics are allocated to Immigration/Asylum and Other, please see the A Guide to Civil and Administrative Justice Statistics.

Applications for permission to apply for Judicial Review

During the first three quarters of 2016, there were 3,281 applications for judicial review, compared to 3,223 applications over the same period of 2015.

The overall annual trend (to 2013) in judicial review applications received had been steadily increasing, with the exception of a dip in 2004. In 2000, there were 4,238 applications for permission to apply for a JR and by 2013, this had risen to an annual intake of 15,594 (over a threefold increase) (Table 2.1). JR Civil (Immigration and Asylum) cases had been driving this increase, up from 2,151 in 2000 to 13,141 in 2013. However, in 2014 there was a trend change and a sharp decrease to 4,065 JR cases being lodged.

______________________________________________________________________

5 Tribunal and Gender Recognition Certificate Statistics Quarterly: www.gov.uk/government/collections/tribunals-statistics

6www.gov.uk/government/statistics/guide-to-civil-and-administrative-justice-statistics (down 74%). This was due to a change implemented(^7) in November 2013, in which the Upper Tribunal for Immigration and Asylum Chamber (UTIAC) took over responsibility for the majority of Civil Immigration and Asylum Judicial Review cases. The reduction in Immigration and Asylum JR cases has resulted in a subsequent increase in Immigration and Asylum tribunal cases. In 2014/15, there were 15,179 JR receipts at the UTIAC, giving a total number of JRs across the Administrative Court and UTIAC of around 20,000. More detailed figures on the number of JRs taking place in the UTIAC are published in the Tribunal and Gender Recognition Statistics Quarterly Publication.

In January to September 2016, 1,913 cases (58% of all JRs) were Civil Immigration and Asylum cases and 26 cases have been subsequently transferred to the UTIAC.

**Figure 2.1: Annual Judicial Review Applications, by type(^8) calendar year 2000-2015**

JR civil (other) cases have remained stable at around 2,000 cases annually, from 2005 to 2014. In 2015 there were 1,748 civil (other) cases. JR criminal cases remained fairly stable from 2000 to 2011, fluctuating between 280-370 cases each year. In 2012 it reached a peak of 384 cases and has since fallen to an all-time low of 261 cases in 2015. In January to September 2016, there have been 173 new cases for JR criminal and 1,195 for JR (civil) other.

(^7) [www.justice.gov.uk/courts/rcj-rolls-building/administrative-court/applying-for-judicial-review](http://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/rcj-rolls-building/administrative-court/applying-for-judicial-review)

(^8) This chart excludes a small number of cases that could not be allocated to a type. Case progression (Table 2.2)

Once a judicial review has been lodged, it then progresses through the process until it is concluded; the time this process will take will be different for each case.

The three main stages of the Judicial Review process once a case has been lodged are:

- **Permission stage** - where the Court’s permission is required for a JR claim to proceed. This can be in the form of an oral or paper hearing.

- **Oral renewal stage** - In cases where the Court refuses permission to proceed on the papers (either in full or in part); this is where the claimant requests that the decision be reconsidered at a hearing.

- **Final hearing** – Where permission is granted for a case to proceed at either the permission or oral renewal stage, this is the point where cases are heard and a judgment is made.

Please note, case progression figures can be affected by the case mix, which has changed over time and thus any previously observed trends should be viewed with caution. As an example different case types can have different mean lengths of timeliness. Civil judicial reviews for immigration and asylum rose from 51% of all cases in 2000 to 84% of all cases in 2013, and stood at 57% in 2015 - this type of case takes longer to complete, therefore overall mean timeliness will increase the greater proportion of these cases within the case mix.

Also, the case progression figures will change each quarter as time allows for more cases to progress through the system.

**Permission stage**

- In 2000, 85% of judicial reviews lodged reached the permission stage and 29% were granted permission to proceed. These proportions decreased gradually over time to an all-time low in 2013 of 54% JRs reaching permission stage and 9% being granted permission to proceed.

- Since the transfer of immigration and asylum cases to the UTIAC (from November 2013) the proportion reaching the permission stage has increased, to 79% in 2014 and remained at this proportion in 2015. Those granted permission to proceed were 16% and 13% of cases lodged in 2014 and 2015 respectively.

- In January to September 2016, the proportion reaching the permission stage stood at 58%, with 9% being granted permission to proceed to date.

**Oral renewals**

- In 2000, 18% of all cases lodged were granted an oral renewal. This rose to 26% in 2001 and has fallen to 10% in 2015. • A fee to renew the claim for an oral renewal was introduced in April 2014 – this may be a contributing factor to the continuing downward trend in the number of claims progressing to the oral renewal stage.

• Not all claims in which permission to apply for judicial review is refused are eligible for renewal. Where a claim is considered by a judge to be totally without merit, the application for permission cannot be renewed to an oral hearing. Similarly, where permission to apply for judicial review is refused in a case brought to challenge a decision of the Upper Tribunal to refuse permission to appeal, the application for permission cannot be renewed to an oral hearing.

• In terms of those granted an oral renewal in 2000, 4% of all cases lodged received an oral renewal and were granted permission to proceed. This proportion has remained essentially stable ever since, and has been at 3% every year from 2008 to 2015, with the exception of 2013 (when the proportion was 2%). In January to September 2016, 203 cases to date have reached the oral renewal stage, of which 55 (2%) have been granted permission to proceed.

Final hearing

• The proportion of cases eligible for a final hearing (granted permission to proceed at permission stage or oral renewal) has steadily reduced over time, from 33% in 2000 to 10% in 2013. The rate stood at 17% in 2015. To date in 2016, 11% of cases (359) have been eligible for final hearing.

• The proportion of all cases lodged found in favour of the claimant at a final hearing has reduced from 12% in 2000 to a low of 1% in 2013. In 2014 it stood at 4% and then decreased again to 3% in 2015. To date in 2016, 48 cases to date have reached the final hearing phase, and 17 of these were found in favour of the claimant.

Timeliness (figure 2.2 and table 2.3)

Timeliness figures are based on the date the judicial review is lodged to the date of various stages of the process. It is not a measure of the time the Administrative Court takes to deal with a judicial review as it also includes time taken for parties to the JR to provide evidence and any adjournments or postponements requested. Caution must be taken when interpreting the most recent data, particularly that for 2015 and 2016 to date, as not enough time has passed for all cases to reach each stage and those that have will be cases that are shorter in length - the average will therefore be lower than the eventual figure (98% of cases lodged in 2014 are classed as ‘Closed’, compared with 91% of cases lodged in 2015, and only 57% of those lodged so far in 2016).

The mean time taken from lodging a case to the permission decision stage remained relatively stable between 2006 and 2013 where the number was 118 and 126 days respectively (reaching a low of 89 in 2008 and 2010); prior to this, the number was stable at approximately 65 days. For those cases lodged in 2015 classed as closed (91% of cases lodged), the mean time taken has reduced back to pre-2006 levels, at 67 days. This may be driven by the reduced caseload, due to most of the Immigration and Asylum cases moving to the UTIAC.

The mean time taken from lodging a case to the oral renewal stage decision has fluctuated over the years. From 2000-2004, the average time was 130 days. This increased rapidly, up to a peak of 267 days in 2007. The figure then fell sharply to 180 days in 2008 before rising to an average of 229 days from 2009 to 2013. For those cases lodged in 2015 classed as closed (91% of cases lodged), the number has fallen to 143 days.

The mean time taken from lodging a case to the final hearing decision showed a similar pattern; 205 days in 2000 peaking to 425 days in 2006 and fluctuating since then. The 2013 figure stood at 374, while the 2014 figure fell considerably to 270 days. For the 91% of cases lodged in 2015 classed as closed, the mean timeliness has fallen to 227 days.

**Figure 2.2: Average time taken for each stage of the Judicial Review process, calendar year 2000 to 2015**

The average time taken to reach each stage is calculated using only those cases that have reached the stage in question. Figures for later years will change in future publications as cases progress through the system, especially for cases lodged in 2015.

Please note that prior to 2014, the timeliness analysis includes cases that were transferred to the Upper Tribunal of the Immigration and Asylum Chamber. These cases were effectively closed on the COINS database in November 2013. Totally without merit (Table 2.4)

In refusing permission for judicial review, a judge can certify a case to be totally without merit (TWM). As part of the Government's reforms to judicial review procedures, for cases issued on or after 1st July 2013, a case refused permission and certified as totally without merit cannot be renewed at the oral renewal hearing stage. A claimant can however appeal against this decision, which would be dealt with at the Appeals Court (in criminal JRs, there is no appeal route from a refusal of permission if TWM). The outcomes of such cases are not recorded in these figures.

Of the 3,281 cases lodged in the first three quarters of 2016, 1,898 have so far reached the permission or oral renewal stage at the time the data was extracted in October 2016. Of these cases, 21% (390) have been found to be TWM.

Annually, the proportion of cases reaching the permission or oral renewal stage that are classed as TWM has seen a slight decline, from 28% in 2013 to 22% in 2014 and then to 20% in 2015 (note that the 2013 figure includes cases that would now be transferred to the Upper Tribunal of the Immigration and Asylum Chamber). Annex A: Planned upcoming changes to publication

There are currently no planned changes to the publication. Annex B: List of Accompanying Tables and CSV

Supplementary tables and CSV datasets are available alongside this bulletin, allowing users to analyse the data themselves.

The following tables are available, showing data for England and Wales:

**Chapter 1 - Civil Courts:**

1.1 County court activity, England and Wales, annually 2000 - 2015, quarterly Q1 2009 – Q3 2016

1.2 Number of claims issued in the county and magistrates' courts, by type of claim, England and Wales, annually 2000 - 2015, quarterly Q1 2009 – Q3 2016

1.3 Claims defended and allocations to track, England and Wales, annually 2000 – 2015, quarterly Q1 2009 – Q3 2016

1.4 Judgments and outcomes in the county courts, England and Wales, annually 2000 - 2015, quarterly Q1 2009 – Q3 2016

1.5 Number of trials and small claim hearings and the average time to reach trial/hearing, England and Wales, annually 2000 – 2015, quarterly Q1 2009 – Q3 2016

1.6 Number of defended claims by case type and details of legal representation, England and Wales, annually 2013 – 2015, quarterly Q1 2013 – Q3 2016

**Chapter 2 - Judicial Reviews in the Administrative Court:**

2.1 Number of case applications for permission to apply for Judicial Review by topic, at the Administrative Court, 2000 – Q3 2016

2.2 Case Progression: number of Judicial Review cases that reach permission stage, oral renewal stage and final hearing by cases lodged, at the Administrative Court, 2000 – Q3 2016

2.3 Timeliness (in days) of Judicial Review cases started at the Administrative Court, by staged reached, 2000 – Q3 2016

2.4 Number of Judicial Reviews at the Administrative Court classed as ‘Totally Without Merit’ annually, October 2012 – Q3 2016

Additional to the tables, there are three CSV datasets that contain county court breakdowns of civil the figures (case workload, case progression and timeliness) for England and Wales. There is a guide that accompanies the CSV files found in the CSV zip-file on the publication web-age.

For judicial reviews, there is a single CSV, which gives case level data from 2000 to the present quarter and also an excel variable list that accompanies the CSV. Annex C: Timeline of changes to civil procedures

- Brooke reforms – April 2013, changed the value limits for money claims allocated to each track.

- Jackson reforms – April 2013, changed the process for managing multi track claims.

- Implementation of the tribunals, courts and enforcement act – April 2014, various changes to the procedures for enforcement of judgments.

- Single county court – April 2014, changed the way in which claims are issued.

- Introduction of secure data transfer (SDT) – November 2014, allowed customers issuing bulk claims to do so more easily.

- Fee enhancements, March 2015 – increased the fee required to issue money claims.

- Debtor petitions (whereby an individual files for bankruptcy), from 6 April 2015 - moved from the courts to an online system and therefore no longer recorded in these statistics. Annex D: Explanatory notes

The United Kingdom Statistics Authority has designated these statistics as National Statistics, in accordance with the Statistics and Registration Service Act 2007 and signifying compliance with the Code of Practice for Official Statistics. Designation can be broadly interpreted to mean that the statistics:

- meet identified user needs;
- are well explained and readily accessible;
- are produced according to sound methods, and
- are managed impartially and objectively in the public interest.

Once statistics have been designated as National Statistics, it is a statutory requirement that the Code of Practice shall continue to be observed.

Breakdowns of many of the summary figures presented in this bulletin, e.g. split by case type or by HMCTS area, are available in the comma separated value (csv) files that accompany this publication.

In the civil section of the publication the terminology ‘hearings or trials’ had previously been used to describe civil claims reaching this stage. We now use the term ‘trials’, as this is a more accurate reflection of what the figures represent. This does not change the historical or current figures reported.

Data Quality and Revisions

Revisions to the statistics for the latest quarter may be made when the next edition of this bulletin is published. Further revisions may be made when the figures are reconciled at the end of the year. If revisions are needed in the subsequent year, these will be clearly annotated in the tables.

The Judicial Review figures are taken from the Administrative Court Office COINS database. As the Judicial Review figures are extracted from this live database, all figures are refreshed each quarter – as a result, there may be minor revisions between the new information presented in the latest bulletin and data published previously.

Symbols and conventions

The following symbols have been used throughout the tables in this bulletin:

.. = Not applicable (r) = Revised data (p) = Provisional data Further information

Earlier editions of this publication can be found at: www.gov.uk/government/collections/civil-justice-statistics-quarterly

For information on Court judgments (including Privacy Injunctions) please see: www.bailii.org/databases.html#ew

Statistics on Tribunals (including Judicial Reviews dealt with by the UTIAC) can be found at: www.gov.uk/government/collections/tribunals-statistics

Statistics on the use of interpreters and translation services in courts and tribunals can be found at: www.gov.uk/government/collections/statistics-on-the-use-of-language-services-in-courts-and-tribunals

Information on Civil County Court Mortgage and Landlord Possession Statistics can be found at: www.gov.uk/government/collections/mortgage-and-landlord-possession-statistics

Information on publicly funded legal services is now published by the Legal Aid Agency and can be found here: www.gov.uk/government/collections/legal-aid-statistics

Information on civil justice in Scotland can be found here www.gov.scot/Topics/Statistics/Browse/Crime-Justice/civil-judicial-statistics/

Information on civil justice in Northern Ireland can be found here www.courtsni.gov.uk/en-GB/Services/Statistics%20and%20Research/Pages/default.aspx#County

A detailed analysis of county court judgments by region produced by Registry Trust Ltd can be found at the link below. This data gives aggregated detail on judgments that have been made by the county courts and recorded on the judgments register. data.gov.uk/publisher/registry-trust-limited

The total number of CCJs differs from that published in Civil Court Statistics Quarterly, because Registry Trust manually checks the details of each judgment. More detail on Registry Trust can be found at: www.registry-trust.org.uk/ Contacts

Press enquiries on the contents of this bulletin should be directed to the MoJ or HMCTS press offices:

**Sebastian Walters (MOJ)** Tel: 020 3334 3529 Email: Sebastian.walters@justice.gsi.gov.uk

**Camilla Marshall (HMCTS)** Tel: 020 3334 3531 Email: camilla.marshall@justice.gsi.gov.uk

Other enquiries about these statistics should be directed to the Justice Statistics Analytical Services division of the MoJ:

**Tara Rose** Ministry of Justice 102 Petty France London SW1H 9AJ Email: statistics.enquiries@justice.gsi.gov.uk

General enquiries about the statistics work of the MoJ can be emailed to statistics.enquiries@justice.gsi.gov.uk

General information about the official statistics system of the UK is available from statisticsauthority.gov.uk/about-the-authority/uk-statistical-system

© Crown copyright Produced by the Ministry of Justice

Alternative formats are available on request from statistics.enquiries@justice.gsi.gov.uk